Every few years it seems, two films telling the same (or similar) story start production near the same time and inevitably, it turns into a race to see who gets to the box office first and who ends up the victor. Armageddon vs. Deep Impact. Antz vs. A Bug’s Life. Snow White and the Huntsman vs. Mirror Mirror. So when John Irvin’s film was set to release opposite Kevin Reynolds’ Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, the studio balked and opted to just release it on television in the States. But does that mean the film was bad?
Or just not, well, a fun Hollywood romp? Join us – Pete Wright and Andy Nelson – as we continue our Robin Hood series with Irvin’s 1991 film Robin Hood.
We talk about what works in this film, but how unfortunately all of that is thrown out of balance by everything that doesn’t work. We marvel at the fact that this is the film that Robin Hood scholars say is closest to the myths. We chat about the performances and wonder if the rough performances are because of the script, the direction, or the actors themselves. And we chat about some changes made to the myth that actually make for a more interesting film, or at least would have if the rest around them worked better.
It’s a frustrating entry to our series, but certainly allows for a fun-filled chat, so tune in! The Next Reel – when the movie ends, our conversation begins.
Join the conversation with movie lovers from around the world on The Next Reel’s Discord channel!
Film Sundries
Thank you for supporting The Next Reel Film Podcast on Patreon!
- Watch this film: iTunes • Amazon • YouTube
- Original theatrical trailer
- Original poster artwork
- Flickchart
- Letterboxd
